CHAP. V. 1641. There is no reason to believe that Hyde judged otherwise than soundly, in opposing both the removal of St. John, and the appointment of himself; but, viewing, as we now do, the whole disastrous course of subsequent events, we are impressed only with the inefficacy of any such advice; and we cannot imagine, that the pursuance of an opposite line of conduct, on these points, would have changed the result of the hostilities which ensued. The King before he left Whitehall renewed his Parliament commands to Falkland, Colepepper, and Hyde, to Falkland, meet frequently, to consult on his affairs, and Colepepper, conduct them in parliament. They were also desired "to give him constant advice what he was "to do; without which, he declared again very solemnly, he would make no step in the par"liament." * The King's interests in entrusted to and Hyde. The three associates met every night, and chiefly at the residence of Hyde, conferring on the events of the past day, and deliberating on their consequent course of operations. Whatever was to be written was committed to Hyde; who, from this time, began to correspond by letter frequently with the King. Hyde had long been suspected, by the predominant party in parliament, of being adverse to their views; but it was not till his opposition to the Remonstrance, that his separation from them, and espousal of the royal cause, were considered no longer doubtful. He became suspected of having * Life of Clarendon, i. 102. V. written the King's Declaration; his actions were CHAP. observed with a distrustful eye; and it did not escape notice, that Falkland and Colepepper, both known to be in the confidence of the King, repaired frequently to his house. It may reasonably be doubted, whether, if the conduct of Charles had exhibited those qualities of discretion and firmness which characterised the language of his Declaration, the royal cause, supporting and supported by the liberties of the people, might not still have been retrieved. We cannot suppose that Hyde, Falkland, and Colepepper believed the cause desperate when they began to espouse it. In the autumn of 1641, there was a returning spirit of loyalty, which would have supported the Crown against the encroachments of a parliament of which the people were beginning to be jealous. They were beginning to perceive, that as the struggle proceeded its character became changed; and that what had lately been a glorious contention for liberty against despotism, was degenerating into a strife between monarchy and oligarchy, in which the real interests of the people were but little concerned. It is probable, that if the King had prudently allowed himself to appear the unretaliating object of parliamentary encroachment, there would have been a reaction sufficiently powerful to restore the unsettled balance of authority. This was to be desired by all who adhered to the constitutional principles of limited monarchy, and more than this 1641. V. CHAP. would hardly have been countenanced by men like Falkland, Colepepper, and Hyde. But the hopes of the rational friends of limited monarchy were soon to receive a fatal blow. 1641. CHAP. VI. AUTHO THE KING'S ATTEMPT TO SEIZE THE FIVE MEMBERS. HYDE'S PARLIAMENT. KING'S MESSAGE ΤΟ PARLIAMENT FROM HAMPTON COURT. ANSWERS AND REJOINDERS. - PROGRESS NORTHWARD. 1642. * WITH CHAP. 1642. CHARLES, on the 4th of January, committed that irretrievable act of mingled perfidy and folly, his entry into the House of Commons, with intent to January 4. seize the five members. It is unnecessary to recount the well known details of this memorable proceeding. To call it folly, is to characterise it mildly. It evinced at least a shameful ignorance of constitutional law. The King attempted to * Madame de Motteville, who saw much of the interior of the court at that period, says that Charles was encouraged to strike this blow by his apparent popularity on his return from Scotland (i. 270.). She also states, that on that eventful day "Charles, en quittant la Reine, lui "avoit dit, en l'embrassant, qu'il alloit être le maître, et qu'il espéroit "dans une heure la venir trouver avec plus de puissance qu'il n'en "avoit à leur séparation;" that Charles was detained by petitioners on his way to the house; and the Queen, when the hour was exprired, thinking the blow was then struck, said, in the presence of Lady Carlisle, "Rejouissez vous; car à l'heure qu'il est, le Roi est, à ce que "j'espère, le maître dans son Etat; et tels, et tels sont, sans doute, "arrêtés." Mémoires de Motteville, i. 271. The King's attempt to seize the five mem bers. CHAP. VI. 1642. Hyde's disapprobation. arrest without a warrant to act, not officially, but as an individual,—and thus, acting without the advice of his council, to destroy that remedy which is afforded by the intervention of responsible ministers, between the subject, and the irresponsible person of the king. It was an act of complicated perfidy, - perfidy to his counsellors, and to the insulted parliament. On the day before his entry into the house, he had, in reply to a request from the Commons for a guard, given an assurance, "on the word of a king," "that the security of "all and every one of you from violence is, and "shall ever be, as much our care, as the preserv"ation of us and our children." It was perfidy to his advisers, to whom he had given a solemn promise that he would do no important public act, without previous consultation with them. Clarendon, writing at a time when indignation at the treachery of Charles was almost absorbed in pity for his misfortunes, thus expresses the feeling this act had excited in the breasts of Falkland, Colepepper, and himself: 66 "The three persons before named, without whose privity the King had promised that he would "enter upon no counsel, were so much displeased "and dejected, that they were inclined never more "to take upon them the care of any thing to be "transacted in the house; finding already that 66 they could not avoid being looked upon, as the "authors of those counsels to which they were so * Rushworth, iv. 472. |